GARDNER-WEBB UNIVERSITY

CRITICAL BIBLICAL STUDIES AND CONFESSIONAL BIBLICAL STUDIES

SUBMITTED TO PROF. L CRANFORDIN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF

RELIGION 600 “RESEARCH SEMINAR”

BYSAM HARRELSON

NOVEMBER 21, 2007

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION…………………...……………………………………………………………1

PARAMETERS AND ESTABLISHING CONTEXT……………………………………………2

Definitions

Critical Biblical Studies

Confessional Biblical Studies

Necessity of a Tool

BIG BANG MOMENT…………………………………………………………………………..6

The Printing Press as a Big Bang

Martin Luther

John Calvin

OUTSIDE FORCES RIP TWO GALAXIES APART…..………………………………………11

Biblical Criticism and Protestant Liberalism

Baruch Spinoza

Hermann Samuel Reimarus

Friedrich Schleiermacher

Johann Christian Konrad von Hofmann

John Gresham Machen

INCREASING RATE OF SEPARATION BETWEEN THE TWO GALAXIES……..…….….18

CONCLUSION…………………………………………………………………………………..21

BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………………………………………..23

ii

INTRODUCTION

Seeking to grasp the entirety of a vast and complicated dynamic such as the differences between

confessional biblical studies and critical biblical studies necessitates implementing a tool to scale

the topic down to an immediate and identifiable level. At that point, the topic of the differences

between these two disciplines, their histories and their implications for teaching in a state

supported or church supported university may be discussed in a more intelligible matter.

The tool used for this paper is based on the work of the New Testament form redaction

critic Quentin Quesnell.1 This method will be developed below, but the brief goal of this method

is to move in concentric circles of study from the smallest level first outwards to surrounding

areas of influence. In order to show the complexity of this issue, this paper has also adapted the

language of contemporary cosmology to provide an analogy for the developments in the histories

and implications of critical biblical studies and confessional biblical studies. Understanding

these complexities will shed light on the final part of the paper, which seeks to establish a best

practices model for the teaching of these methods in their respective settings of the secular and

ecclesial related university.

1 Quentin Quesnell, The Mind of Mark: Interpretation and Method Through the Exegesis of Mark 6:52 (Rome: Biblical Institute, 1969).

1

PARAMETERS AND ESTABLISHING CONTEXT

The present state of critical biblical studies as it relates to confessional biblical studies can be

imagined as something like two galaxies within the large expanse of the universe. These

galaxies are composed of similar elements which have gone on, in some cases, to combine with

other elements and form larger and larger pieces of matter. Some of these groupings of matter

eventually form stars and inside those stars more elements are produced. If we picture critical

biblical studies and confessional biblical studies in this cosmological manner, these two galaxies

had their origins, with all other galaxies in the universe, at the moment of the big bang.

Specifically, these two galaxies can be thought of as having a common older ancestor

galaxy from which natural forces (strong force, weak force, nuclear force, gravity, and

electromagnetic force) gradually nudged them away from this common point and caused them to

move in separate directions. This slow movement away from each other has escalated rapidly in

the last century, so the amount of shared space and material that these two galaxies once shared

has greatly lessened. As a result, a picture of these two large and slowly moving galaxies, full of

their own stars and matter and material, shows the gradual cessation of relations and shared

correspondences between them.

Definitions

Before we examine the big bang moment which launched the shared history of these two

galaxies which would eventually rupture into two distinct professions, it is important that

2

definitions of critical biblical studies and confessional biblical studies be provided to allow for a

space of discussion.

Critical Biblical Studies

Critical biblical study is more or less broadly affiliated and associated with the quasi-scientific

process of investigating a text’s transmission, development and origins.2 Issues such as a text’s

linguistic, literary, cultural, religious, political, sociological, psychological, economic and

anthropological context. Sub-genres of critical biblical studies can include source, form,

redaction, tradition, rhetorical, and the more contemporary post-modern reader response

criticisms. In general, critical biblical studies seeks to answer the important question of what

historical circumstances a text refers to, and out of what historical contexts did the text, in its

final and received form, emerge?

Confessional Biblical Studies

Confessional biblical studies had its birth within the same big bang moment of what eventually

developed into critical biblical studies. However, like Jacob and Esau, the twins struggled within

the womb and eventually that struggle led to alienation and separation. Even though they are

separated, confessional biblical studies and critical biblical studies share a common birthright

and history of development until movements within their own galaxies and forces outside of

these galaxies forced them apart from one another.

Nevertheless, the two galaxies still share a small amount of overlapping material in space

and time. There is still the conversation between these two disciplines, and both employ similar

tools in their attempts to come to terms with the biblical texts. Confessional biblical studies can

2 Richard E. Burnett, Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible, Kevin J. VanHoozer, ed (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 2005) 290.

3

be thought of, in general terms, as an attempt to study and understand the bible through the lens

and hermeneutic of belief with the equipment of contemporary means of textual, historical and

literary analysis. Briefly, confessional biblical studies seek to provide a community of faith with

the ability to learn from the text of the bible and its surrounding context in the ancient near east

within a paradigm of truthfulness of scripture, and authority of the bible. Additionally,

confessional biblical studies would posit these writings of humans as a vehicle for divine truth.

Necessity of a Tool

The task of the individual seeking to understand how these galaxies originated, why they

gradually moved apart and where their future movements might take them in the class room is

daunting. In the context of a project such as this one, a tool is needed to go back in space and

time to locate the beginnings of these disciplines, their trajectories of movement and change

within, the affects of outside natural forces, and their future movements.

Quesnell’s Approach

In his assessment of the allegorical nature of the parable of the ten bridesmaids (Matthew 25:1-

13), Karl Paul Donfried3 makes a series of important insights, including adapting the redaction-

critical methods of Quentin Quesnell to better understand the setting of the parable. In this

treatment of the complicated relationship between critical and confessional biblical studies, I will

follow a similar practice with modifications which I will highlight throughout.

Briefly, Donfried applies Quesnell's approach to Matthew 25:1-134 by beginning with the

smallest circle (the immediate text), then gradually moving to larger circles (the entire NT), and

then to parallels beyond the New Testament when necessary. Therefore, the interpreter doing

3 Karl Paul Donfried, “The Allegory of the Ten Virgins (Matt 25:1-13) As a Summary of Matthean Theology,” JBL 93 Issue 3 (September 1974): 415-428

4 ibid, 416

4

analysis must always try to interpret the text from the smallest possible circle, the one closest to

it, first and then move on to the next larger circle and so on.

Similarly, I will adopt Donfried's application of Quesnell within the cosmological

analogy of critical biblical studies and confessional biblical studies as two large galaxies which

once had a shared position in space and time but have gradually moved apart from one another

by first investigating the crucial moments of the big bang of the academy which led to the

development of biblical studies in general. After that investigation, the movement of these two

large galaxies in a similar course will be investigated to show early similarities which existed

and which still have correspondences in the contemporary world. Then, the forces which ripped

these two galaxies apart and started them on their separate paths of movement in the universe of

the academy will be analyzed, pointing to such influences as cultural ethos and historical events

such as war and political situations. Finally, the project will turn to asses the rate of separation

between these two galaxies in the context of their teaching capabilities in the settings of a secular

university or a church related institution of higher learning.

5

BIG BANG MOMENT

About three seconds after the Big Bang event roughly 14 billion years ago, energy was slowly

cooling to form the simplest forms of matter such as quarks, muons, gluons and other strangely

named particles. As these tiny particles themselves cooled, they began to clump together to form

larger constructs such as protons and electrons. 300,000 years later, these protons and electrons

began to form attractions and clumped up to form the simplest atoms such as hydrogen and

lithium.

These irregular clumps did not smooth themselves out and tended to bunch-up in

particular areas of the rapidly expanding young universe. It took another 300 million years for

these tiny atoms of hydrogen to form a big enough clump to undergo the intense pressure and

energy release needed to cause the birth of stars. Our own sun is probably a third generation star

and formed around 10 billion years after the Big Bang. There are four basic forces which help to

construct the universe as we humans know it. If we refer to the critical biblical studies and

confessional biblical studies as a tiny micro-cosmos, we can see the same cosmic dance being

played out due to those outside forces of cultural conventions and political/historical contexts.

Before the introduction of a definable area of scholarship belonging to critical biblical

studies or confessional biblical studies existed, learning the bible largely rested on what can best

be described as a pre-critical reading.5 Hans Frei gave the name “strongly realistic” this line of

tradition of reading and studying the bible, writing it was “at once literal and historical, and not

5 Roy Harrisville and Walter Sundberg, eds, The Bible in Modern Culture: Theology and Historical-Critical Method from Spinoza to Kasemann (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995) 14.

6

7

only doctrinal or edifying. The words and sentences meant what they said, and because they did

so they accurately described real events and real truths that were rightly put in those terms and

no others.6” However, the Enlightenment Period brought with it severe challenges to this

hegemonic strong reading.

Perhaps beyond the importance of individual thinkers, theologians and scholars was the

invention of a rather simple machine, the printing press. The printing press revolutionized the

world’s ability to obtain data, information and knowledge and set in binding a worldview of

textual authority. However, the printing press also enabled a democracy of ideas to flourish,

giving (literate) lay people and scholars alike the chance to grapple with ideas, spread

communications and for the first time in history, adequately mass produce an idea.

The Printing Press as a Big Bang

The invention of the printing press can effectively be seen as the force behind the explosion of

the big bang in our analogy. With its invention, a strange combination of molecular particles

helped to construct some of the forces that would later rip apart the galaxies of confessional

biblical studies and critical biblical studies.7

The combination of the printing press with the zeal for literary and historical knowledge

of the bible first appearing in Renaissance humanism caused an intellectual explosion and a

scholarly revolution, which for a while was contained within a shared galaxy, but would

overtime lead to the distancing of critical biblical studies from confessional biblical studies. As a

field of study, biblical scholarship came into its own through the adaptation of the printed book.8

6 Hans Frei, The Eclipse of the Biblical Narrative (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1974), 1.7 Jaroslav Pelikan, Whose Bible Is It? A History of the Scriptures Through the Ages (NY: Viking, 2005),

183.8 Ibid, 183.

8

The rapid adaptation of public letters which eventually morphed into journals allowed

scholars the ability to share new insights and information while documenting these conversations

for others interested in the field, but not highly trained enough to participate. The ability to

create, join or observe conversations in written form necessitated the creation of an entire

profession of scholarship pertaining to the Bible. These scholars, in turn continued to create new

tools to help themselves identify, define and analyze the canonical texts of the bible. As a result,

a new form of scholarship, outside of dogma, was created in a relatively short amount of time.

In order to properly asses the later scholars who helped develop the related but

increasingly separate fields of critical and confessional biblical studies, two important figures,

who act as elementary particles for later large groupings of matter in our analogy, who stand at

the beginnings of the two galaxies of critical and confessional biblical studies must be included.

Following Quesnell’s approach, we turn to two scholars who have had considerable long

term impact on both critical and confessional biblical studies. Only after an analysis of their

importance on the fields will it be possible to move to the next circle of consideration, the

Enlightenment.

Martin Luther

Martin Luther (1483-1546) is one of the first figures to commit himself into a willing act of

defiance against the dominant precritical readings of the bible.9 Luther employed a principal

which made him radically suspicious of some parts of the bible. His tool was based in a

fundamental dogmatism which pivoted on the connection between law and gospel. Briefly,

Luther’s concept of law included God’s design and structure for society as well as the

identification of all individuals as sinful. His concept of gospel provided a basis for his claim of

9 Roy Harrisville and Walter Sundberg, eds, The Bible in Modern Culture: Theology and Historical-Critical Method from Spinoza to Kasemann (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995) 15.

8

9

God’s gracious love through Jesus Christ10. These two concepts, when joined together created

his lens of suspicion, which along with other scholars and the growing body of literature as a

result of the printing press, would lead to a protestant ethic of critical studies.

For example, Luther publicly and famously denounced the Epistle of James and called it

a “strawy epistle” because of Luther’s understanding of faith as the only precursor to grace and

his interpretation of the epistle as supporting a need for works. Luther would also make critical

statements such as his assertion that Kings is more historical than Chronicles or question Esther’s

place in the canon as a result of its omission of God. Most importantly, Luther, in large part,

abandoned the medieval system of allegorization (literal, allegorical, anagogical and tropical

interpretations) in favor a discipline of study which allowed the texts to speak for themselves in

context of the surrounding passages and canon11. In some ways, his insights were close to those

of the late 20th century canonical critics such as B.S. Childs.

John Calvin

John Calvin (1509-1564) followed Luther’s principal of allowing the text to speak for itself over

and against the role of purely ecclesiastical or allegorical interpretations. Calvin goes even

further than Luther in rejecting allegory, and this is the key importance of his position within the

galaxies of critical and confessional biblical studies. Additionally, Calvin made use of fields of

study external to the bible (such as language, classical studies, philosophy and even rudimentary

science) to illuminate his analysis. These keen developments of Luther’s practice of scholarship

10 Ibid. 11Ibid, 17.

9

10

would lay the framework for later liberal Protestants eager to find meaning within the text and

outside of allegory and ecclesiology.

10

OUTSIDE FORCES RIP TWO GALAXIES APART

The conflict which exists between the ecclesial community and the historically minded critics of

the bible has existed, in some form, from the beginning of the scholarly movement away from

dogmatism. Critical biblical studies, as has been pointed out, originated as opposition to the

dogma of the church from within the liberal political philosophy gaining momentum in

Enlightenment Europe.12

“What is Enlightenment?” asks Immanuel Kant in one of his famous rhetorical flourishes.

He answers with:

Enlightenment is man’s release from his self-incurred tutelage. Tutelage is man’s inability to make use of his understanding without direction from another. Self-incurred is this tutelage when it cause lies not in lack of reason but in lack of resolution and courage to use it without direction from another. Sapere aude! “Have the courage to use your own reason!” – that is the motto of the enlightenment.13

Similarly to the conflict which has always existed between critical and confessional

biblical studies, the forces which today drive matter and energy away from each other, as small

as protons and electrons, or as large as galaxies, were created at the moment of the big bang. In

effect, the moment which gave birth to the universe may also be the moment which introduced

the forces that will cause either the big chill or the big crunch.

In the big chill, matter and energy are forced away from each other at an increasing rate

due to repulsion of forces and spread so thin that particles loose contact with each other and the

universe basically performs the act of diffusion.

12 Roy Harrisville and Walter Sundberg, eds, The Bible in Modern Culture: Theology and Historical-Critical Method from Spinoza to Kasemann (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995) 2.

13 Immanuel Kant, On History, ed. Lewis White Beck (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1963), 3.

11

The big crunch, on the other hand, says that there will be something like another big bang

when all the matter and energy of the universe eventually re-clumps back together due to the

nature of space and time (along with quantum mechanics). These two models do serve as

potential models of critical and confessional criticism. Either the two disciplines will move

away from each other at an increasing rate to the point of no return, or the two galaxies will

somehow recombine in a moment of regeneration and recreation of biblical scholarship.

What cannot be ignored in these possibilities is the existence of external forces. In

cosmology, these forces include the strong force, weak force, gravity and the electromagnetic

force. These forces have various amounts of strength and are responsible for holding together

and keeping apart every piece of matter and energy in the universe. Without the existence of

these forces, the universe as we know it would not have been able to form, and would look very

strange to us. Similarly, biblical studies as a discipline is subject to external forces which helped

shape the rupture that occurred between critical and confessional biblical studies.

With the advent of the Renaissance in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, a renewed

sense of interest and application of ancient history was engendered. Further, the development of

the scientific historical method outside of the realm of biblical studies was developed14. The

application of this method, in opposition to the hegemonic dogmatic method which had held

sway with Christian scholars since the Patristic Period, caused the final rupture between critical

biblical studies and confessional biblical studies and created the shifts of these two galaxies away

from each other.

14 Lorin L. Cranfod, Modern New Testament Interpretation (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1996), 117

12

Biblical Criticism and Protestant Liberalism

Following a heritage of rationalism, liberal Protestants were zealous about free inquiry into the

church’s past.15 The hinge truth behind the movement of liberal Protestants in this period was

the belief that modern individuals could exercise their own authority over individual experiences

and encounters with custom and truth.

Essentially, they held that the Jesus of Nazareth as the Jesus of History could be

recovered as a zen-like master of rational and moral insights applicable to their own

experiences16. These teachings then were free from the hegemonic domination of church dogma

and ecclesial politics. As a result, liberal Protestants declared the universality of Jesus and his

teachings, and the ability of his message to transcend every age. These teachings and his

message, according to this line of reasoning, are to be found in ethical ideas acceptable to the

modern mind.

Many of the events surrounding liberal Protestants and the increasing separation occurred

in Germany due to its political and social context at the time relative to other European countries,

especially England.17 Unlike England, Germany in the eighteenth century was not saturated with

deism. Rather, Germany was still recovering and coming to grips with events and implications

of the religious wars which devastated the Holy Roman Empire throughout the 1600’s. Various

reform movements in German Lutheranism (such as Pietism) during the eighteenth century

encouraged a critical reading of texts (especially the biblical texts) with a noted influence of the

personal and individual reader encouraged to look at the texts to make their own conclusions.

15 Roy Harrisville and Walter Sundberg, eds, The Bible in Modern Culture: Theology and Historical-Critical Method from Spinoza to Kasemann (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 26.

16 Ibid, 27.17 Jonathan Sheehan, The Enlightenment Bible (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005), 55.

13

14

Additionally, the growing model of the German University as a place of careful analysis

had taken root, allowing for the development of disciplined tools to exegete and critic biblical

passages.18

In order to better evaluate the two galaxies of critical biblical studies and confessional

biblical studies, which up to the point of the early Enlightenment had been able to reconcile their

differences, we turn to individuals important in helping to define the two disciplines. In doing

so, we see that their scholarship and abilities opens the two galaxies of practice into even more

conflict.

Just as Quesnell has prescribed, we’ve moved from discussing the elementary particles of

these galaxies (definitions) to small molecular bits which compose everything (Luther and

Calvin) and now to individual stars within the galaxies. Inside the nuclear furnace of stars, new

elements are baked into existence. As these stars mature and age, they give off elementary

particles which stream throughout the galaxy interacting with other particles and forming new

molecules. When these stars explode in supernova, these elements are violently thrown into the

surrounding galaxy, just as the insights of the following scholars.

Baruch Spinoza

Spinoza was born into a violent time of religious tension as Jew with Spanish heritage in 1632.

Spinoza’s family had fled Portugal for the Netherlands where they were able to embrace their

orthodox Jewish faith. Later in life, he would disavow himself of his Jewish faith, although his

scholarship of religion was intensely passionate. Spinoza wrote an extended treatise on biblical

criticism using then modern methods of analysis in Theological-Political Treatise.19 Spinoza’s

18Ibid, 61.19 Roy Harrisville and Walter Sundberg, eds, The Bible in Modern Culture: Theology and Historical-

Critical Method from Spinoza to Kasemann (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 39.

14

goal was to place dogmatic Christianity as he saw it under the reign of reason, and thereby

neutralize its truth claims while providing a suitable venue of open investigation into its origins

and historical identity. By using historical criticism, Spinoza was attempting to free society from

the destructive force of religious passion.20

Hermann Samuel Reimarus

Reimarus was an eighteenth century German scholar who is widely credited with initiating the

investigation for the historical Jesus.21 His most famous work, Apology did not appear until after

his death. He was especially sensitive to the critiques of Christianity by those reading and

radicalizing Spinoza and sought to use the developing tools of criticism to bridge the gap

between critical and confessional studies. However, his work was filled with inconsistencies of

method, leaping from denying the place of the Old Testament and the miracle narratives to

insisting on the limitations of historical studies to parts of the Bible22.

However, one key insight that Reimarus makes in his Apology is the need for historical

tools in resurrection of the gospel narratives. This insight, coupled with later developments in

critical theory, would ultimately lead to the popular “Search for the Historical Jesus.”

Friedrich Schleiermacher

20 Ibid, 45.21 Wikipedia contributors, "Hermann Samuel Reimarus"Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, n.p. [cited 10

Nov. 2006]. Online: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermann_Samuel_Reimarus

22 Roy Harrisville and Walter Sundberg, eds, The Bible in Modern Culture: Theology and Historical-Critical Method from Spinoza to Kasemann (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 62.

15

16

Schleiermacher was a pivotal figure in the nineteenth century rupture between critical biblical

studies and confessional biblical studies. Schleiermacher’s works are invaluable to the study of

the rift between the two disciplines. In many ways, one of his most important advancements of

scholarship can be understood as his development of the hypothesis which led later scholars such

as David Friedrich Strauss to study the myth-building capacity of the early Christian community

in their construction of the personhood of Jesus.23 Schleiermacher sought confidence in the

biblical record by locating the mission of the recorders (writers, redactors) of that record

themselves, seemingly eliminating the need for faith and trust according to critics24.

Confessional Biblical Critics

Johann Christian Konrad von Hofmann

Von Hofmann can easily be considered a reactionary to the biblical critical method and an

espouser of the confessional scholarship of the nineteenth century. His work is largely a reaction

to the works of Protestant scholasticism on the European continent and the writings of David

Friedrich Strauss. Von Hofmann derided Strauss as an enemy of the Christian faith for his

attempts to historically critique the early Jesus movement and personhood of Jesus.25 He also

rebelled against the popular form of Protestant scholasticism at the time, saying its legalism and

doctrine of verbal inspiration to understand the bible’s historical character were erroneous.26 The

bible cannot be completely free of error or inconsistencies, he argued, because it is not God

itself.27

23Roy Harrisville and Walter Sundberg, eds, The Bible in Modern Culture: Theology and Historical-Critical Method from Spinoza to Kasemann (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 75.

24 Ibid, 77.25 Ibid, 137. 26 J.C.K. von Hofmann, Interpreting the Bible, trans. Christian Preus (Minneapolois: Augsburg, 1959), 14-

16.27 Roy Harrisville and Walter Sundberg, eds, The Bible in Modern Culture: Theology and Historical-

Critical Method from Spinoza to Kasemann (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 139.

John Gresham Machen

Machen was a late nineteenth and early twentieth century American scholar who also reacted

strongly to the advancements of critical methods applied to biblical scholarship, especially those

of Strauss. However, he was not far away from the protestant Liberals in proclaiming that the

meaning of Jesus for contemporary worshippers was not in the life of the historical person of

Jesus or the events (miraculous or not) recorded in the gospels. Rather, the relevance of Jesus to

contemporary life is the experience of his “inner life” known through his moral teachings and

examples in the gospels.28

28Ibid, 191.

17

INCREASING RATE OF SEPARATION BETWEEN THE TWO GALAXIES

Pope Benedict XVI wrote that “at its core, the debate about modern exegesis is… a philosophical

debate. Only in this way can it be carried on correctly. Otherwise it is a battle in the mist. The

exegetical problem is identical in the main with the struggle for the foundations of our time.”29

In cosmology, when galaxies move apart from one another, we can record their

movement due to their red shift or blue shift.30 Galaxies, and other large objects emitting light,

give off electromagnetic radiation in the form of light, gamma, UV and X rays. Using special

technology, we can observe whether or not a galaxy is moving away from us or towards us due

to its red shift or blue shift. If a galaxy has a red shift (literally more red in the spectrum), then

the radiation waves coming from the object are longer than the median, and therefore the object

is moving away from our position here on earth. If a blue shift is present, that means the

electromagnetic waves emitted from the object are shorter and the galaxy is moving towards our

position here.

In many ways, the analogy of critical biblical studies and confessional biblical studies as

two large galaxies within a universe of scholarship has proven a worthy device throughout this

project. However, in this case, that is especially true. Identifying these moving and fluid

galaxies as large entities composed of certain stars (scholars) moving away from each other in an

increasing rate is a valid way to understand the large scope of this paradigm. Specifically,

29 “Biblical Interpretation in Crisis: On the Question of the Foundations and Approaches of Exegesis Today,” This World 22 (1988): 14.

30 Wikipedia contributors, "Red Shift"Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, n.p. [cited 16 Nov. 2006]. Online: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshift

18

acknowledging that these two galaxies have different red shifts and blue shifts as they move

away from a once common location in space and time is quite fruitful.

In order to analyze this increasing rate of separation between the two galaxies of critical

biblical scholarship and confessional biblical scholarship, we will move to Quesnell’s prescribed

outer level, which in this case will be the teaching of these two methods within the realm of a

secular state supported school and church related institution.

State supported institutions differ from church supported institutions in that the mode of

critique and application of scholarly methods differs due to a number of reasons. First, a state

supported institution seeks to find a level of objectivity and non-partiality in the study of

religion. This approach lends itself to the necessity of scientific tools in a subject such as biblical

studies. In the case of state supported institutions, the subject of biblical studies altogether

would be covered under the umbrella of a religious studies department with a mix of religious

traditions and cults (in the broad sense of the word) studied with no impartiality given to one

specific faith. On the other hand, church supported institutions are inherently given to support,

whether implicitly or explicitly, a specific platform of faith. In order to provide such an

education, confessional biblical studies are seen as a much “safer” and profitable route to achieve

the mission of such colleges.

Second, the financial backings and atmospheres of state supported schools compared to

church related schools demonstrate the need of a more scientifically based model of scholarship

in terms of religion. This is especially true in the case of Christianity, as state supported schools

must be careful not to seem to too closely espouse dogma since a great deal of the funding for

these institutions originates with taxpayers and governmental agencies under a constitutional

mandate. Church related institutions, however, do not share the same constitutional or societal

19

pressures to keep religion and government separate, and therefore are able to pursue a

confessional biblical studies platform to achieve their stated missions of teaching while

providing an avenue for deeper faith within the student body.

20

CONCLUSION

The analogy of critical biblical studies and confessional biblical studies as two large galaxies

existing and continually moving within a larger universe of academic study has provided an

adequate model for understanding the nature of these two disciplines of study. Using Quentin

Quesnell’s form redaction method, we have seen how these two galaxies found their origins with

the moment of a big bang in the printing press, and then developed from elementary particles

into larger groupings of molecules.

Eventually, new stars formed within these galaxies sharing a close position in space and

time. However, because of outside forces and developments within these galaxies themselves,

critical biblical studies and confessional biblical studies began to drift apart in the vast universe

of the academy. The galaxy of critical biblical studies resides in the family of state supported

institutions while confessional biblical studies have moved into the quadrant of critical biblical

studies. While these two disciplines still share a small amount of matter and method, they have

become independent entities within the universe of academics.

21

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Barr, James. Holy Scripture: Canon, Authority, Criticism. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1983.

Corley, Bruce and Steve Lemke and Grant Lovejoy, eds. Biblical Hermeneutics: A Comprehensive Introduction to Interpreting Scripture. Nashville, Tennessee: Broadman & Holman, 1996.

Donfried, Karl Paul. “The Allegory of the Ten Virgins (Matt 25:1-13) As a Summary of Matthean Theology,” Journal of Biblical Literature 93 Issue 3 (September 1974): 415-428

Frei, Hans. The Eclipse of the Biblical Narrative. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1974.

Harrisville, Roy and Walter Sundberg, eds. The Bible in Modern Culture: Theology and Historical-Critical Method from Spinoza to Käsemann. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1995.

Hart, D. G. The University Gets Religion: Religious Studies in American Higher Education. Baltimore, Maryland: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999.

Pelikan, Jaroslav. Whose Bible Is It? A History of the Scriptures Through the Ages. NY: Viking, 2005.

Sheehan, Jonathan. The Enlightenment Bible. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2005.

Van Hoozer, Kevin, ed. Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 2005

Von Hofmann, J.C.K. Interpreting the Bible, trans. Christian Preus. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg, 1959

Wikipedia contributors, "Hermann Samuel Reimarus.” Cited 10 November 2006. Online: Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermann Samuel Reimarus

Wikipedia contributors, "Red Shift." Cited 16 November 2006. Online:Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/redshift.

22